Put new text under old text.-Unless you are following something up.
I generally archive my Talk Page-Around every 15 messages.
Please sign and date your entries-by inserting ~~~~ at the end.
I sometimes rename section headers-to help me navigate.
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
With the 50 Cent template, do the dots that separate the songs and albums look the same in your screen? Here's the before and after versions. On the after version, the dots look larger and darker. Also, "Follow My Lead" doesn't stay within the borders of the template. Is this the same for your browser? Spellcast 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
If it looks the same on your browser, it's understandable. I was on the 50 Cent discography page and I realised there was a horizontal scrollbar on my screen. At first, I thought it must've been one of the tables but then I realised it was the template. I also have IE7 (which I rarely use) yet I could still see a difference for some reason. Anyway, it's sorted out now. Spellcast 07:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Edits to Wikipedia:Record Charts
Please do not run AWB over this page again, or other articles in its present configuration. It is improperly formatting line breaks by removing the backslash, which is improper HTML, and on this page in particular, it formatted one of the superscripted numbers as an actual superscript character, which is intentionally avoided. Are you using the default settings, or is this something you have set up yourself? If default, let me know and I'll have to speak with the creator of the program. -- HuntsterT • @ • C 17:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Cool, thanks for replying. They do the same thing, but the <br /> is more correct for modern HTML (actually XHTML) than <br>, so please don't change those in the future. Cheers -- HuntsterT • @ • C 21:29, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
Also, you need to be careful that you don't change any <br /> tags inside <nowiki>...</nowiki> sections, as noted above. --PEJL 21:41, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I was also wondering why <br /> was used despite looking the same as <br>. I've seen several community-approved scripts that convert to <br />.[1][2]. It seems the slash is needed for compatability with XHTML. You might also want to see this. Spellcast 07:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
The slash is needed for compatibility with XHTML, but we're not writing XHTML, we're writing the input to MediaWiki, which handles both forms the same (as well as other broken forms, such as <br\>). So either is generally fine, but if you're going to convert anything (which you should be careful with, as noted above), you should probably convert to <br />, not the other way around. --PEJL 09:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok, So it's basically to make WikiPedia compatible with programs/people who try to read the whole sites code?. I'll be sure to change my AWB settings to change all variables of <br>, <br\> etc to <br/>. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 15:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, you generally don't need to do that, as MediaWiki does it automatically, and it shouldn't always be done (as previously noted), which is why AWB doesn't do it by default. --PEJL 15:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I should probably say this now as I see you're using AWB to convert all <br> tags to <br />. It's probably unnecessary but if you are going to do it, I think PEJL and Huntster (and those diffs I gave) showed a space before the slash (<br />). Spellcast 16:45, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
But the / is just to close it like in <references/>, it could be <references />. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
I read the space before the slash isn't required but unspaced tags might not be compatible with older browsers. I know it's a very minor issue that won't have any effect, but it might as well be said. Spellcast 17:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I just read that too on the XHTML page. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, from what I understand Wikipedia renders all forms of <br/> (<br>, <br /> etc) the same, however when people save an article as a HTML page for example, it will display differently. The / is added after to close it because it was never opened (I think), similar to <references/>. Anyway <br/> is the proper [[XHTML]] format. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 19:19, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
It seems my point hasn't gotten across, so I'll repeat it. When you are writing an XHTML document, you should convert all <br...> to <br />. When you are writing a Wikipedia page, you should not generally convert all <br...> to <br />, because:
You aren't writing XHTML.
MediaWiki converts automatically when it generates an XHTML page.
Doing so unconditionally may break pages (see above).
You may clean up <br...> if you do it manually, because it should only be done in the correct context. --PEJL 06:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
RE: Editor Review & Navbox Colours
No, no. I didn't mean it like that. I was kinda blaming myself not using consensus. I guess I was trying to be bold in categorizing the Navboxes based on something. I guess I didn't really think that that kind of shit needed a consensus, but I guess I was wrong. Sorry if you misunderstood me, and I will do my best in the future in using consensus. TheChronic 01:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on 50 Cent/Archive3, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because 50 Cent/Archive3 is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting 50 Cent/Archive, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself.CSDWarnBot 09:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
Templates
Why thank you! :) It's almost become my full time gig on here. :) --WoohookittyWoohoo! 00:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Just Thought i'd tell you
I just thought i'd tell you that I added your name to a list of Wikipedians I Respect at my user page, and if you would like to delete your name you can--Yankees10 23:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I know we had that little fued about how the G unit feuds should be structured, but we got over that and have been pretty cool since, and I think you have done a great job at improving the G Unit articles and other rap related articles, keep up the great work--Yankees10 16:01, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Great job
Yo, I know we have beefed before on stuff but I appreciate the work you have been putting in to organize the articles and everything. You have been doing a great job, so keep that shit up and we can keep these articles on lock. --Ayoleftyz 17:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
For sure. --Ayoleftyz 17:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey, if you have Yahoo shoot me your addy. --Ayoleftyz 01:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi there The-G-Unit-Boss, as promised, I've added my review. Hope it helps you, if you have any questions then you know where I am. Keep up the great work. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Re: "Mediatakeout.com"
Oh ok, thanks for telling me, because I was actually believeing it.
-Tyler
The Drought Is Over 4 Mixtape
Wwhat wrong with my "The drought Is Over 4 (Lil Wayne Mixtape" page, because I have my refences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ntarty (talk • contribs)
Category:Big Syke
Category:Big Syke has been nominated for deletion; you are invited to participate in the discussion located here. – Black Falcon(Talk) 00:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Yo, I was wondering do you know any tracks of Power of the dollar? Ive heard How to Rod, Ghetto Q, Thug Love, any others? Also there should be a bit more on it on Wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuurtis (talk • contribs)
Editor blanking content
The editor's only contributions have been to blank content (see here). To me that sends up a red flag. Best, --Bfigura(talk) 21:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, you're correct. There were some good faith edits on the 50Cent article. However, everything up until then had been blanking (which made me suspect that the first 50-cent edit was nonsense, since there wasn't alot of context there). Best, --Bfigura(talk) 21:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
And on even further consideration, I think this edit justifies some skepticism. Best, --Bfigura(talk) 21:18, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
